Untitled Document
With regulatory compliance high on the corporate agenda, standards such as
PCI, SOX, HIPPA, etc., require that data be handled securely. Not only do networks
need to be secured, but they also must demonstrate security via comprehensive
reporting.
Arguably, legislature and governance are constantly playing catch up with the
increasingly threatened online world. New standards are an important and positive
development, but they often fall short of recommending specific technologies
that help maintain a secure digital infrastructure.
Traditional security products have long concentrated on protecting the network
perimeter. Although some organizations use firewall technology on their
internal networks, it is unfortunately far more common to encounter a lack of
security at the network core. Implementing endpoint security is one approach
to this gap in defense, but this method can be unwieldy in large networks. Users
require different applications so it is unlikely that a single one size
fits all desktop configuration will be realistic. Multiple desktop configurations
and user profiles are the norm and require multiple endpoint security policies.
Before the widespread use of PCs and the Internet, company networks typically
ran in isolation using a plethora of proprietary protocols and hardware. This
provided security by obscurity. Hackers and virus writers had to learn
about different vulnerabilities for each new target. Their target surface area
was limited to the system they were currently focused on. Now, we live in a
world where the PC dominates the enterprise and the Internet is an essential
part of business life. However, this uniformity of technology has leveled
the playing field for hackers, virus writers and other vagabonds of the information
world.
Some of the best known security applications (e.g. anti-virus) have depended
on signature engines to identify threats. Signature engines compare production
data to a list of known patterns. If the signature engine identifies a
match, then it alerts or takes some kind of mitigative action. Signature-based
threat identification is very effective for known threats but is limited in
identifying the unknown. This exposes a fundamental weakness in many signature
engines. The workaround is to continually update the list of signatures.
But, there is a noticeable and potentially costly gap, in terms of downtime
and extensive infection, while anti-virus struggles to create a suitable signature
to identify new threats. Many viruses and worms are easily disguised so
that anti-virus engines cannot detect them until the next signature update.
1